dig the quote jeseth jefferson is the nam all of our 4 fatherzunderstood life,gratification,acceptence of challengrs,rebelz we are ,rebelz will be , I do not define myself as satanic,just a person of spirit of flesh,of divine,using elementz to heal andstrenthen. i do not say satanic because of taboos, like christianz who wont reconize fucing in their dictionary.I share respect for all people,religinz cultures,the problem is people do nott give the same respect.

I agree when you view it as a fact, but I disagree if you view it on a more objective level. Yes, if you have the power to do so you can kill anyone you like and rewrite history. But that do not make the Nazis understanding of Darwin and evolution scientific correct, and it does not make me agree on there views. The Christians are the majority today and they have the power to do what ever they like to including using atom bombs to kill off all life on the planet earth. But does that make me convert to Christianity, "see the light" or accept it if Christians banned Satanism, science, humanism, homosexuality, womens rights, abortion etc.? Hell no! I am very sure that you would have to agree with me on this point. If not, you would not be on a satanic forum...

Originally Posted By: Fist

Should we save drug addicts or simply allow them to overdose and die in the street? Should we execute child molesters? If a person steals from me do I have the right to kill them?

Sorry, but it is not that simple. I know that you guys gust wants to kill off as many people as possible, but my view is on society and the victims. You want to kill off all child molesters? I can see why you would want to kill off some of them, but I see some serious problem with just killing off all of them. I will list a few:

1) Most sexual child abuse is done by close relatives, most often an uncle or a stepfather. The molester should of cause be punished, but in most cases killing the abuser would hurt the child more then the abuse itself.

2) The time of the Satanic Panic gave us a lessen: some cases of alleged sexual abuse are are false, and it is often almost impossible to prove what happened. It is hard to change a wrongful sentence if the person is dead.

3) Hard sentences do not keep people from committing crimes. They do not think about the chance of getting caught and punished when they do the crime. Thoughts about getting caught usually come up only after the crime, an the possibility of death sentences would probably make more sexual abuser kill the victim to hide the crime.

4) Most of the people who commit child abuse where abused as children themselves. This is no excuse, but it gives society the possibility to do something BEFORE a new child is abused. My focus is on keeping children from harm, not on killing as many as possible.

Killing criminals could be be the sensible thing to do, and I personally would feel like killing of those who tried to abuse my own kids. But if your focus is on a peaceful society or on the victims, then other ways of dealing with criminality is more obvious. Killing off a two year old child because he tries to take a bit of your apple would be insane.

Originally Posted By: Fist

most of the crime is perpetrated by certain minorities - mostly blacks and hispanics.

Most bluecollar crime is perpetrated by the undereducated and poor. Most whitecollar crime is probably committed by white people. If you kill of all the poor minority people you will just get the same amount of crime from a new lover class of undereducated and poor white people.

Bottom line: you hate the "mud people" and want to kill us all of. You can speak as mush as you like about "what should be done", and "how it is the right and good thing to do", but I don't buy your explanation about think about the welfare of society.

I agree with your conclusion to an extent, but I don't believe an individual can "decide on a specific meaning" for Satanism. The world already has a meaning.

If you look how the word is used it is used to cover may kinds of phenomena and groups. If all people on the planet earth voted on a definition, the Christian definition would be voted in. LaVey was the inventor of modern Satanism, but not the first one to define Satanism, and even when you look at those who say they follow the teachings of LaVey differ on how they read him. Fact is: today we have a lot of very different groups claiming the title of Satanism. This is hard to ignore.

Maybe you don't mean to, but you come off with a bit of an overbearing attitude. The way in which your posts are written seem to imply that you simply are here to correct all of those far less than you.

I am sorry about that. That was not my intention. Maybe it looked like that because my first encounter with any users of the board was in the form of very angry and personal attacks from a girl, and because I have tried to keep the text short without too many discussions. I it also a bit hard for me to express myself in English. I usually use a lot of words and nuances when I write in danish but I am not able to do so in English.

Originally Posted By: Sordid Archetype

Since you are quite interested in the appropriate use of words, I would like you to consider this however: Words themselves are a man-made method of communicating abstract concepts to other men. In order for this to work, both men involved in a discussion must have the same understanding for the words being used in order for any proper transfer of concept to be performed. If one man thinks that "red" is a colour, while another thinks "red" is an animal, there will be a great difficulty in one understanding anything the other is speaking about.

And that is exactly what the text is trying to deal with in the first part of the text. I am sorry if this isn't obvious.

Originally Posted By: Sordid Archetype

Likewise, if 100 people believe Satanism to be one thing, and 1 person believes it to be something entirely different, then chances are the 1 person is wrong. Not because what everyone else thinks must be right, but because when you are trying to use a medium that is supposed to transfer ideas among a mass of people and the mass of people have all agreed upon how they will transfer their ideas, simply using a conflicting definition base would completely hinder the purpose of the medium in the first place (which is communicating with those others who have already established a functional base).

I agree, but the use of words DO change, and people DO use words like "Satanism", "Christianity", "faith" etc. in very subjective ways. Ask ten satanists, and you would probably get ten more or less different explanations. Unless we want to deal with ”heretics” we have to accept this.

When dealing with phenomenas like Satanism you also have to consider the reality behind the word. The most used definition of Satanism is the Christian one, but most people who claim to be satanists use another definition of the word. Because of this satanists, Christians ans academics have to deal with at least two definitions of Satanism if they want to say anything about real live satanists out in the real world.

Originally Posted By: Sordid Archetype

why would I have to write any material for anyone, about satanism or anything else? The truth of the matter is that I do not HAVE to do anything that I do not wish.

I agree, but I was a bit tiered of people who complained about what I had written without giving it a go themselves. It is not hard to criticize, but it is a bit harder to come up with something of your own.

Originally Posted By: Sordid Archetype

To ME, satanism is a religious structure that an individual may elicit to aid himself in his transcendental quest of personal excellence. It utilizes esoteric means to accomplish personal goals, whether or not the ideologies are accepted by the "collective virtue," and maintains the precepts of a Darwinist view (the strong shall inherit...) The strongest keystone for satanism is that an individual may become the construct for his own moral and creative base, and hence "become a god" in doing so.

That is a nice personal definition. Thank you. I am sure you would be able to expand it, and it is clear that your personal definition make you able to decide if something is included in your definition of Satanism or if it is not. On the other hand, I am sure that we can agree that your definitions isn't universal, and that an academic/objective definition would have to deal with the most common beliefs in the big mish-mash called Satanism.

There seems to be quite a few interpretations of what Satanism is. Though I'm sure most of these definitions are drawn between various cultures and subcultures (i.e. christians generally have one similar view whereas the people on this board have another generally similar view).

Some definitions from Dictionary.com:Sa·tan·ism:–noun- The worship of Satan or the powers of evil- A travesty of Christian rites in which Satan is worshiped- A belief in and reverence for devils, especially Satan

These definitions apply to Traditional Satanism, or the Christian stereotype of literal devil worship.

For the definition of Modern Satanism started by LaVey in the 1960s (and taken on by many other groups besides LaVeyan Satanists), I would like to propose the following definition:

Sa·tan·ism:–noun.......- (Usage from 1960s)A philosophy of life (often incorporating occult and ritualistic elements) which rejects traditional Judeo-Christian values, while stressing realism, the empowerment of the individual, and life-affirming ideals, symbolised by Satan.

This definition seems broad enough to encapsulate most of today's forms of Modern Satanism.

So if we add this to the dictionary definition of Satanism as a legitimate post-1960s usage of the term - we can now unpack the word 'Satanism' into three meanings:

(1) The Christian stereotype of 'devil worship', literal belief in and worship of the Christian devil as understood by church orthodoxy (nonexistent, but popular usage is still a significant (mis-)definition)

(2) Traditional Satanism - with the best definition: 'A belief in and reverence for devils, especially Satan', stressing that this involves a literal theistic belief system - belief in a god or gods (even if these are called Satan or demons).This does involve a belief in a being called Satan and worship of such a being - but Satan is understood very differently here than in Christianity, allowing him to be seen as a positive figure to worship.

(3) Modern Satanism (as defined above)As with Traditional Satanism, 'Satan' is not the literal Christian devil, but a completely different beast.As I defined it (correct my definition if you will), the modern definition of Satan is as a symbol of life-affirming values.There may be a metaphysical or occult aspect to Satan, but this is in the context of a philosophy of life which affirms the individual.

Completely ignoring the retarded definitions of LaVeyan fundamentalists (who insist that ONLY LaVeyans can be Satanists), we now have three main definitions of Satanism.(Are there any more valid ones?)

"It could be about translation, but I think it is more about education? "

Do Not question my educational background. I have no need to prove to you how smart I am or which degrees I have or what I am doing with my life now.

I questioned your methods, not your education, but your lack of practical hands on knowledge.

"And? You can still identify many kinds of Satanism, and the individual satanist have to choose his kind of Satanism, if he wants to be able to *explain* what his beliefs are about. You need to have a definition of Satanism if you want to say anything sensible about Satanism."

If you had spent anytime here reading the boards and posts verses just posting your ideas about that which you think we dont know. YOU would have found that this was already covered. The members here are usally intellgent, rational, and think about the things they post. They take an active role in their beliefs and know who they are and what makes them tick.

They and I dont need some big defining statement about what Satanism is. We know what it is. If it has to be explained to you, you are not a Satanist. True Satanists are born, not made, not converted. Its just something that was inside all along.

ONA, try google.

"But I have an issue whit the "friends" I choose. I do not want to take the blame for others just because they claim to be satanists."

A friend is a friend.An idiot is an idiot.Take the time to know people and learn the difference.

Morgan

Enjoy your time here, go read the previous posts on all the different boards.

_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear Fuck em if they can't take a jokeDon't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass

"No I have not. I am not the only danish satanist who have done so for more then ten years and no one have ever had any harm come to them. A few have had to step back a bit because of work, but no one have had any real trouble."

Then that is luck, like I said when someone slips something under your door, or is waiting for you outside your house, don't say you were not warned.

Wasn't the son of some famous artist killed by a muslim for just making a movie about mohammad in denmark last year?

The public image of Satanism is beyond tv now. With the internet, U-tube, cable access channels, any idiot with a video camera can get his views on tv.

Back with Lavey, there was no cable, no internet, no cell phones, no u-tube. There was just maybe less than 10 channels, he had a captive audience.

"My point was that you need to talk about Satanism in the plural. The is not one Satanism but many satanisms"

Damn, you should really read a board before you post. You should read what people say. This is well know here, and already said by me and others.

Oh, and dont play that I'm waiting game with me. I have a life outside the internet and will reply to anything you say when I get a chance.

Morgan

Enjoy...............

_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear Fuck em if they can't take a jokeDon't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass

I am not calling you uneducated or stupid. The remark about education is aimed at the different values and ways of viewing and explaining. When you look at psychology, sociology, philosophy and so on you can identify different schools. I most cases you will see a difference between European and American schools. This is one way to look at differences in education. Another is when you view at differences in the way different disciplines deals with topics. My text is influenced by European philosophy and sociology.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

"And? You can still identify many kinds of satanism, and the individual satanist have to choose his kind of satanism, if he wants to be able to *explain* what his beliefs are about. You need to have a definition of satanism if you want to say anything sensible about satanism."

Yes, I am still saying that. I have met people on this board who viwe ONA as the true kind of Satanism and racial way as the highest aim of ONA and Satanism. I think most would agree that this is not the most common explanation of Satanism. This is a very specific kind of Satanism, and yes, I think we need to deal with different kinds of Satanism if we want to say anything besides useless stuff like "Ever satanist have his personal opinion, so we cant't really say anything about anything, and we cant explain what Satanism is and what it isn't"

Originally Posted By: Morgan

If you had spent anytime here reading the boards and posts verses just posting your ideas about that which you think we dont know. YOU would have found that this was already covered. The members here are usally intellgent, rational, and think about the things they post. They take an active role in their beliefs and know who they are and what makes them tick.

The text was written years ago and only translated lately. I wrote that. It would be paranoid to think that it was aimed at you or this board. I am very happy to know that I found the only satanic board in the would with 100% reflected and mature satanist who do not need to think more about how to define Satanism, or if Satanism is plural or singular.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

They and I dont need some big defining statement about what Satanism is. We know what it is. If it has to be explained to you, you are not a Satanist. True Satanists are born, not made, not converted. Its just something that was inside all along.

I have a question: Did you even read the text and if you did, did you read the whole text? Am I defining what Satanism is and what it isn't? No, I think not. I am making some reflections about different definitions you can find out there - like Christian definitions, academic definitions, definitions used by some organizations or other organizations and so on. Evey definition I use is used out in the real world. You can go as the christians. They will tell you that Satanism is about worshipping the devil. You can ask the Church of Satan. They will tell you that the only true Satanism is the one invented by LaVey, and that they are the only ones who are keeping his legacy. Other groups will tell you something different. I think I most have talked to more then 1.000 satanists over the years, and every satanist have his own definition on one hand, and is part of more general trends on the other (like ateistic, LaVeyan, theistic). Do you see Satanism as singular? I don't believe that, onles you are a defender of the idea of "one true Satanism".

Then that is luck, like I said when someone slips something under your door, or is waiting for you outside your house, don't say you were not warned.

I am no expert on the US, but I have an education that include sociological, political, historical and religious aspect of the US. We also view TV news and read about what happens in the US. When did you last read a book on Denmark or see a news story about the country? Denmark is different from the US in may ways. It is called one of the most secularized countries in the would. The Danish kind of Christianity is called "Belonging without believing" by some sociologists.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

Wasn't the son of some famous artist killed by a muslim for just making a movie about mohammad in denmark last year?

Nope, I think this was in the Netherlands. We had a newspaper publish pictures of Muhammed and that offended a lot of muslims - but no one in Denmark got killed. Your president called it stupid to offend other peoples beliefs, but most Danes think it is okay to offend religion in the name of free speech.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

The public image of Satanism is beyond tv now. With the internet, U-tube, cable access channels, any idiot with a video camera can get his views on tv.

Yes, that is the case in the US but not in Europe. In Denmark we are only 6 million people. We do not have all those TV networks, Magazines and newspapers you guys have. We only have two TV channels that all Danes are able to see. I made around 30 interviews in ten years. Most of them in national media. In the same time only about tree other satanists made more then two interviews. In Denmark we have only had four satanic organizations in the last ten years. The tree of them lasted under a year and between them the organized like 5 % of alle the organized satanic orgs. in Denmark. This is how it is in Denmark and more or less how it is in other small countries - the way satanists present Satanism do matter and we are able to change the way the media talk about Satanism. It is very different in the US, yes, I know that, and I know that you don't have the same posibilities. On the other hand - I do get American google alerts from online media on Satanism - more then 100 a month - and I do see changes and some organizations popping up more then others. Church of Satan and other orgs. do influence the way the media deals with the topic.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

Back with Lavey, there was no cable, no internet, no cell phones, no u-tube. There was just maybe less than 10 channels, he had a captive audience.

And many small European countries are still like that...Denmark only have two national channels that all Danes are able to view and only like 10 national newspapers. It isn't hard to get more viability in Denmark then LaVey had in the US.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

Damn, you should really read a board before you post. You should read what people say. This is well know here, and already said by me and others.

As far as I know (please correct me if I am wrong) this board is associated with satanists who think the Church of Satan got it all wrong and are misusing LaVeys legacy. The board is also a forum used by different kinds of satanists - some belonging to orgs., som satanists are old, some are new. On this kind of board that part of the argument isn't telling anyone anything new, but that would not be the case in other less plural boards. On this board plurality of Satanism has to be viewed as something positive.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

Oh, and dont play that I'm waiting game with me. I have a life outside the internet and will reply to anything you say when I get a chance.

Look who I wrote it to - it was aimed at an specific person because of the way she attacked me. If someone calls you a lowlife and criticizes your life and efforts it is often interesting to see where they themselves are coming from.

Completely ignoring the retarded definitions of LaVeyan fundamentalists (who insist that ONLY LaVeyans can be Satanists), we now have three main definitions of Satanism.(Are there any more valid ones?)

When Satanism in viwed from an objective point of view, focused on the most common ways of using the term, I would agree on your definitions as valid.

In my article I also tried to discuss some of the common but less sensible ways of defining Satanism, and I also tried to make room for more nuanced and personal definitions. When you look at the guys who see racial war as the main focus of a theistic Satanism a more nuanced definition of Satanism would have to view his definition as separate from, let's say the teistic satanic groups like The Temple of Set in the old times when they where still viewing themselves as satanists, or from anti-racist groups within Satanism (Atheist as well as theistic).

Every organization and every satanists has is or her own definition of Satanism. Some definitions are inclusive and include everything from Buddhism to Hitler, some are less inclusive and only related to LaVey or a nother person or org. Some personal kinds of Satanism are well thought trough, other satanists found Satanism two days ago and are still confused abut what to believe.

"The text was written years ago and only translated lately. I wrote that. It would be paranoid to think that it was aimed at you or this board. I am very happy to know that I found the only satanic board in the would with 100% reflected and mature satanist who do not need to think more about how to define Satanism, or if Satanism is plural or singular."

AS I said, you just cut and pasted your essay without exploring the board. Thank you for admitting to it. I did not think it was aimed at this board, just poorly aimed in general. I will ignor your sarcasm.

I just find it kinda sad that you have spent at least 10 years collecting articles about Satanism written by non-satanist. How can a person who is not a satanist give an explantion in the type of general, specific, scientific view if they dont understand first hand? Their personal bias will always cloud their view on the topic. If you have spoken to thousands, then why did it take you so long to find this place, and why did no one ever hear about you?

"Do you see Satanism as singular? I don't believe that, onles you are a defender of the idea of "one true Satanism". "

Okay, there is one true idea or archtype. After that you have different views, ideas, beliefs, groups, and cultures. It starts with one thing, and grows from there. In regards to the one thing being, the one idea, pick a different historical culture. Read over its religious texts, stories, its cultural ideas, and you will see that they all have the "man in black" in common no matter what name they use.

Morgan

_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear Fuck em if they can't take a jokeDon't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass

okay, you have 6 million people in your whole country. I have more than that just in the city where I live.

I don't mean any disrespect or anything, but is this relevant to the topic? Because to me, it just seems like a penis measuring contest there. It doesn't really matter how big a country is to be honest. What matters is what the country and the inhabitants are like as a whole. Although I've never visited Denmark, I can imagine it to be a pleasant place to visit and/or live, of which you've already acknowledged.

Although, your closing statement is plausible and not insulting. Seems the opening statement is though.

Sorry if I've offended. I just thought I'd share my views on this particular part of the argument.

Now concerning the topic of "One or more forms of Satanism", I have to agree with the theory of an archetype spawning other variants. After joining this forum, I've learned that there is more than one form of Satanism, rather than LaVeyan Satanism being the "one and only" form. And as we all know, whichever form you subscribe to is the choice of the individuals.

Although, I find Theistic Satanism beside the point, as Satanism is the opposite of Christianity (since Satan was the opposing force in the bible), so Satan to me just seems to be just a name to represent the opposite of the spiritual beliefs of Christianity and other religions. Worshipping Satan as a deity just seems like another form of Christianity to me.

But that's just my opinion.

I'm not trying to bash anyone else's personal beliefs and/or chosen paths. That's your choice and preference, and that's fine with me, since you aren't pushing it down my throat. That's just how I view Theistic Satanism.

okay, you have 6 million people in your whole country. I have more than that just in the city where I live.

Yes, and with that knowledge you should be able to form some kind of idea about some of the differences between the US and Denmark. The point was, that the way satanists act in in the media and on the internet actually does a difference in a small country. Scroll up and see what you said about the media, abut me being lucky because I hadn't been hurt by kooks and so on.

Originally Posted By: Morgan

YOu admitting to just posting your essay without reading any of the posting on the boards, end of story. AS I said, the people here are bright, and different. Something you have recently learned.

I went on the internet when LaVey was still alive. Maybe this forum is very different from any other satanic forum - who knows. I would be very surprised if this was the case. The only real surprise I have had has to do with the number of Nazis and racists you have on the board. Congratulations - you actually surprised me with those.

When I posted the text, I also explained that it was an old text and that it had been translated from Danish. With that in mind, it is paranoid to accuse me of making and posting the text as an attack on you or any of the users on this board. I see that you agree with me on some of the ideas, but make a point of "explaining" how I am totally off because I'm telling you stuff that you already know. Like duh! - The text was not written with you in mind, and if some of the points is old hat, then those points are aimed at other people to whom they are new. Point being: if we agree on some points, then there is no need to feel offended by this. If you have visited other board I am sure you have seen lots of people with opinions different from both mine and your. Just visit the one and only Church of Satan if you need prof.

Bright? Sure, but you also have your share of loons, loosers, geniuses, oldtimers and neewbees as any other forum. I also see oldtimers complaining about too many bitch fights.